Jump to content
IGNORED

Chords New M -Scaler


Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, barrows said:

  A full featured server will never achieve the lower noise footprint of a well designed, high end, Renderer.

Debatable at best.  I would say it's already been surpassed, the renderer.  Due to it's reliance on the preceding stream initiation.  It is becoming more and more an unnecessary fixer component that only adds inflexible complexity.

(JRiver) Jetway barebones NUC (mod 3 sCLK-EX, Cybershaft OP 14)  (PH SR7) => mini pcie adapter to PCIe 1X => tXUSBexp PCIe card (mod sCLK-EX) (PH SR7) => (USPCB) Chord DAVE => Omega Super 8XRS/REL t5i  (All powered thru Topaz Isolation Transformer)

Link to comment
On 7/23/2018 at 9:42 AM, ElviaCaprice said:

Proof is in the pudding.  Tested by others and found to make a big difference, number of taps.  So big, that it has been recommended by those using the Blu mscaler and now the Hugo mscaler, to be a far more important SQ upgrade over any server tweaks upstream.    Basically a must for those with the coin and in the Chord system build.  

Anyone else that says otherwise is obviously talking from back seat science and not from actual listening.  Thus disregard them.

What an excellent post: with such rampant speculation here on CA by naysaying "engineers," - comments like yours above are not prevalent enough....

Thank you!

Link to comment
27 minutes ago, ElviaCaprice said:

Debatable at best.  I would say it's already been surpassed, the renderer.  Due to it's reliance on the preceding stream initiation.  It is becoming more and more an unnecessary fixer component that only adds inflexible complexity.

Just factually wrong, this is not debatable at all.  The noise footprint of a full server is easily measurable to be way larger than that of a well designed Renderer.

SO/ROON/HQPe: DSD 512-Sonore opticalModuleDeluxe-Signature Rendu optical with Well Tempered Clock--DIY DSC-2 DAC with SC Pure Clock--DIY Purifi Amplifier-Focus Audio FS888 speakers-JL E 112 sub-Nordost Tyr USB, DIY EventHorizon AC cables, Iconoclast XLR & speaker cables, Synergistic Purple Fuses, Spacetime system clarifiers.  ISOAcoustics Oreas footers.                                                       

                                                                                           SONORE computer audio

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, barrows said:

Just factually wrong, this is not debatable at all.  The noise footprint of a full server is easily measurable to be way larger than that of a well designed Renderer.

What facts?  Show us the listening test results and the comparable measurements.

(JRiver) Jetway barebones NUC (mod 3 sCLK-EX, Cybershaft OP 14)  (PH SR7) => mini pcie adapter to PCIe 1X => tXUSBexp PCIe card (mod sCLK-EX) (PH SR7) => (USPCB) Chord DAVE => Omega Super 8XRS/REL t5i  (All powered thru Topaz Isolation Transformer)

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, ElviaCaprice said:

What facts?  Show us the listening test results and the comparable measurements.

You can choose to believe what you want, but that does not make it true.  This is simple stuff here, I have made the measurements, but one hardly needs measurements anyway.  It is pretty easy to see why a well designed, high end, Renderer has a lower noise footprints than any server, just power consumption alone will answer this for you, without even having to go into details such as onboard regulator types, or processor power, etc.

How do you suppose that a full computer using say even a low 60 watts, is going to produce less noise than a Renderer running on 5 watts?

SO/ROON/HQPe: DSD 512-Sonore opticalModuleDeluxe-Signature Rendu optical with Well Tempered Clock--DIY DSC-2 DAC with SC Pure Clock--DIY Purifi Amplifier-Focus Audio FS888 speakers-JL E 112 sub-Nordost Tyr USB, DIY EventHorizon AC cables, Iconoclast XLR & speaker cables, Synergistic Purple Fuses, Spacetime system clarifiers.  ISOAcoustics Oreas footers.                                                       

                                                                                           SONORE computer audio

Link to comment
46 minutes ago, Albrecht said:

Your speculation here is of course as irrelevant as any "claim" of pet features. Differences in phase filter implementation may play an important, or less important role in the final end result of what one may hear coming out of their speakers. The ONLY way to know is to actually conduct listening tests. ANYTHING else is speculation.

 

"" If two men say they're Jesus, one of them must be wrong.""

A bad analogy: of course there is no right or wrong as what makes Chord or Ayre DACs both very good DACs may or may not be based exclusively on their implementation of phase filters.

 

""I still think he's overdone it to an extent that is hard to justify."

It is really great that very few people would agree with you, and form an opinion about a product on the basis of such unreasonable speculation. Also, a somewhat indirect insult to not only Chord engineers, but to others as well.

Did that outburst make you feel better?

Link to comment
55 minutes ago, ElviaCaprice said:

Debatable at best.  I would say it's already been surpassed, the renderer.  Due to it's reliance on the preceding stream initiation.  It is becoming more and more an unnecessary fixer component that only adds inflexible complexity.

 

9 minutes ago, barrows said:

 

How do you suppose that a full computer using say even a low 60 watts, is going to produce less noise than a Renderer running on 5 watts?

 

(JRiver) Jetway barebones NUC (mod 3 sCLK-EX, Cybershaft OP 14)  (PH SR7) => mini pcie adapter to PCIe 1X => tXUSBexp PCIe card (mod sCLK-EX) (PH SR7) => (USPCB) Chord DAVE => Omega Super 8XRS/REL t5i  (All powered thru Topaz Isolation Transformer)

Link to comment
15 minutes ago, mansr said:

That difference only matters if the noise is coupled through to the DAC output at a level that is a) audible and b) correlated to the power consumption. If the computer manages to keep the noise contained, or the DAC can keep it out, your argument goes nowhere.

And then, for those who believe that the noise does not matter, they may as well just run a standard laptop into their DAC via USB, I am fine with that if that is what they want to do.

 

But I know form experience that doing so will leave a lot of audio performance on the table, I have have never heard a single DAC which does not produce significantly better sonic performance when fed from a high end, low noise source component.  It would be nice if DACs were indeed immune to source component quality, but in the real world I have never come across one that is.

SO/ROON/HQPe: DSD 512-Sonore opticalModuleDeluxe-Signature Rendu optical with Well Tempered Clock--DIY DSC-2 DAC with SC Pure Clock--DIY Purifi Amplifier-Focus Audio FS888 speakers-JL E 112 sub-Nordost Tyr USB, DIY EventHorizon AC cables, Iconoclast XLR & speaker cables, Synergistic Purple Fuses, Spacetime system clarifiers.  ISOAcoustics Oreas footers.                                                       

                                                                                           SONORE computer audio

Link to comment

deleted, Chris is right...

SO/ROON/HQPe: DSD 512-Sonore opticalModuleDeluxe-Signature Rendu optical with Well Tempered Clock--DIY DSC-2 DAC with SC Pure Clock--DIY Purifi Amplifier-Focus Audio FS888 speakers-JL E 112 sub-Nordost Tyr USB, DIY EventHorizon AC cables, Iconoclast XLR & speaker cables, Synergistic Purple Fuses, Spacetime system clarifiers.  ISOAcoustics Oreas footers.                                                       

                                                                                           SONORE computer audio

Link to comment

@barrows this thread is about the Chord HMS.  Please don't turn it into a thread about the superiority of streamers.

Pareto Audio AMD 7700 Server --> Berkeley Alpha USB --> Jeff Rowland Aeris --> Jeff Rowland 625 S2 --> Focal Utopia 3 Diablos with 2 x Focal Electra SW 1000 BE subs

 

i7-6700K/Windows 10  --> EVGA Nu Audio Card --> Focal CMS50's 

Link to comment
On 7/25/2018 at 4:17 PM, firedog said:

Isn't this "filling in the gaps" a misconception? So I don't think that's the rationale behind the design. 

 

Yes. Fs= twice band limited signal is sufficient. Upsampling is something else (although I suspect it was a rhetorical question).

Link to comment
4 hours ago, Albrecht said:

"I still think he's overdone it to an extent that is hard to justify."

It is really great that very few people would agree with you, and form an opinion about a product on the basis of such unreasonable speculation. Also, a somewhat indirect insult to not only Chord engineers, but to others as well.

 

I think Mans’ was a perfectly reasonable post; suggesting “enough is as good as a feast”, to which Rob Watts would presumably reply, “yes - but too much is better!”

 

As has been suggested, it seems well within the capabilities of software often discussed here to upsample using similar parameters to those used by the M Scaler. It should be trivial (and there must be someone out there with access to both the Chord device and suitable software) to compare hadware with such software. 

 

Genuine question. What do you (anyone) suppose the M Scaler brings to the table over and above such a software implementation?

 

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Andyman said:

 

Sounds just like you Chris!

 

I am also in the ease of use and simplicity camp.

 

And honestly, I did not know (and still have not been educated as to the recipe for) that there are software solutions that can work with streaming content on a standard Windows PC through both wasapi and windows mixer (which I use for certain web radio offerings via a browser)....

 

After all, everything is a make vs buy at some point.... It's more than just the MScaler -- there's also needing to find the right pairing with the DAC, etc.  I was willing to buy Blu2.  If starting  today, I wouldn't even ponder the hesitations I had at the time with HMS for half the price.  That's how much I like what I experienced. That's a personal statement of course.  A solution I was already happy with instead of building, experimenting... Simple as that.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, rickca said:

@barrows this thread is about the Chord HMS.  Please don't turn it into a thread about the superiority of streamers.

 

 

Thank you.  Lets keep this topic on track.  IF you have nothing to discuss about the Chord M-Scaler move on and start your on thread,.

The Truth Is Out There

Link to comment
7 hours ago, mansr said:

I believe him to be sincere in his desire to build the best possible DAC.

 

He's also currently building what he considers to be the best ever A-to-D converter (his DAVINA Project). So in time, he may be able to show some measurements that show what can affect the analogue output.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...